Effect of implant diameter and cantilever length on the marginal bone height changes and stability of implants supporting screw retained prostheses: A randomized double blinded control trial
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effect of implants’ two different diameters and cantilever lengths on the marginal bone loss and stability of mplants supporting maxillary prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety-six implants were placed in sixteen completely edentulous maxillary ridges. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, implants were placed with a cantilever to anterior-posterior AP spread length (CL:AP) at a ratio of 1:3; Group B, implants were placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of1:2. Patients were further divided into four sub-groups: Groups A1, A2, B1, and B2. Groups A1 and B1 received small diameter implants while Groups A2 and B2 received standard diameter implants. Bone height and stability measurements around each implant were performed at 0, 4, 8 and 24 months after definitive prostheses delivery. RESULTS. Statistical analysis of the mean implant stabilityand height values revealed an insignificant difference between Group A1 and Group A2 at all the different time intervals while significantly higher values in Group B1 in comparison with Group B2. Results also showed significantly higher values in Group A1 in comparison with Group B1 and an insignificant difference between Group A2 and Group B2 at all the different time intervals. CONCLUSION. It can be concluded that the use of small diameter implants placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:3 provided predictable results and that the 1:2 CL:AP significantly induced more critical bone loss in the small diameter implants group, which can significantly reduce long term success and survival of implants.
Abstract
PURPOSE. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effect of implants’ two different diameters and cantilever lengths on the marginal bone loss and stability of mplants supporting maxillary prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety-six implants were placed in sixteen completely edentulous maxillary ridges. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, implants were placed with a cantilever to anterior-posterior AP spread length (CL:AP) at a ratio of 1:3; Group B, implants were placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of1:2. Patients were further divided into four sub-groups: Groups A1, A2, B1, and B2. Groups A1 and B1 received small diameter implants while Groups A2 and B2 received standard diameter implants. Bone height and stability measurements around each implant were performed at 0, 4, 8 and 24 months after definitive prostheses delivery. RESULTS. Statistical analysis of the mean implant stabilityand height values revealed an insignificant difference between Group A1 and Group A2 at all the different time intervals while significantly higher values in Group B1 in comparison with Group B2. Results also showed significantly higher values in Group A1 in comparison with Group B1 and an insignificant difference between Group A2 and Group B2 at all the different time intervals. CONCLUSION. It can be concluded that the use of small diameter implants placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:3 provided predictable results and that the 1:2 CL:AP significantly induced more critical bone loss in the small diameter implants group, which can significantly reduce long term success and survival of implants.
참고문헌 (37)
- Flanagan D, "Mini implants supporting fixed partial dentures in the posterior mandible : A retrospective", J Oral Implantol, 41, pp.e138~43 (2015)
- Jackson BJ, "Small-diameter implants : a treatment consideration for the maxillary edentulous patient", Dent Today, 32, pp.86~ (2013)
- Flanagan D, "Fixed partial dentures and crowns supported by very small diameter dental implants in compromised sites", Implant Dent, 17, pp.182~191 (2008)
- Yaltirik M, "Clinical evaluation of small diameter Straumann implants in partially edentulous patients : a 5-year retrospective study", J Dent(Tehran), 8, pp.75~80 (2011)
- Schiegnitz E, "Oral rehabilitation with dental implants in irradiated patients : a meta-analysis on implant survival", Clin Oral Investig, 18, pp.687~698 (2014)
- González-Valls G, "Narrow diameter dental implants as an alternative treatment for atrophic alveolar ridges. systematic review and meta-analysis", Materials(Basel), 14, pp.3234~ (2021)
- Al-Nawas B, "A prospective noninterventional study to evaluate survival and success of reduced diameter implants made from titanium-zirconium alloy", J Oral Implantol, 41, pp.e118~25 (2015)
- Polack MA, "Titanium-zirconium implants:Case report. Immediate provisional and restoration using a small-diameter system", Dent Today, 31, pp.64~ (2012)
- Hasan I, "Biomechanics and load resistance of small-diameter and mini dental implants : a review of literature", Biomed Tech(Berl), 59, pp.1~5 (2014)
- Gleiznys A, "New approach towards mini dental implants and small-diameter implants : an option for long-term prostheses", Stomatologija, 14, pp.39~45 (2012)
- Klein MO, "Systematic review on success of narrow-diameter dental implants", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 29(Suppl), pp.43~54 (2014)
- Schiegnitz E, "Narrow-diameter implants : A systematic review and meta-analysis", Clin Oral Implants Res, 29(Suppl 16), pp.21~40 (2018)
- Misch CE, "Dental implant prosthetics", pp.452~471 (2005), Elsevier Mosby
- Maló P, "All-on-4 immediate-function concept with Brånemark System implants for completely edentulous maxillae : a 1-year retrospective clinical study", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 7(Suppl 1), pp.S88~94 (2005)
- English CE, "Critical A-P spread", Implant Soc, 1, pp.2~3 (1990)
- McAlarney ME, "Determination of cantilever length-anterior-posterior spread ratio assuming failure criteria to be the compromise of the prosthesis retaining screw-prosthesis joint", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 11, pp.331~339 (1996)
- Karoussis IK, "Effect of implant design on survival and success rates of titanium oral implants : a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System", Clin Oral Implants Res, 15, pp.8~17 (2004)
- Misch CE, "Implant suchttpscess, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference", Implant Dent, 17, pp.5~15 (2008)
- Khorshid HE, "The effect of anterior-posterior spread and cantilever length on the supporting structures of maxillary screw retained prosthesis", Egyptian Dent J, 63, pp.1955~1964 (2017)
- Misch CE, "contemporary implant dentistry", pp.367~388 (2008), Elsevier Mosby
- Purcell BA, "Anteroposterior spread and cantilever length in mandibular metal-resin implant-fixed complete dental prostheses : A 7-to 9-year analysis", Int J Prosthodont, 28, pp.512~518 (2015)
- Drago C, "Ratios of cantilever lengths and anterior-posterior spreads of definitive hybrid full-arch, screw-retained prostheses: results of a clinical study", J Prosthodont, 27, pp.402~408 (2018)
- Walter L, "Utility of measuring anterior-posterior spread to determine distal cantilever length off a fixed implant-supported full-arch prosthesis : A review of the literature", J Am Dent Assoc, 151, pp.790~795 (2020)
- Lachmann S, "Influence of implant geometry on primary insertion stability and simulated peri-implant bone loss : an in vitro study using resonance frequency analysis and damping capacity assessment", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 26, pp.347~355 (2011)
- Turkyilmaz I, "Biomechanical aspects of primary implant stability : a human cadaver study", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 11, pp.113~119 (2009)
- Merheb J, "Influence of bony defects on implant stability", Clin Oral Impl Res, 21, pp.919~923 (2010)
- Su YH, "Evaluation of the implant stability and the marginal bone level changes during the first three months of dental implant healing process : A prospective clinical study", J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 110, pp.103899~ (2020)
- Gedrange T, "An evaluation of resonance frequency analysis for the determination of the primary stability of orthodontic palatal implants. A study in human cadavers", Clin Oral Implants Res, 16, pp.425~431 (2005)
- Brouwers JEIG, "Resonance frequency analysis with two different devices after conventional implant placement with ridge preservation : A prospective pilot cohort study", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 23, pp.789~799 (2021)
- Friberg B, "Stability measurements of one-stage Brånemark implants during healing in mandibles. A clinical resonance frequency analysis study", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 28, pp.266~272 (1999)
- Supachaiyakit P, "The influence of implant design on implant stability in low-density bone under guided surgical template in inexperienced surgeons : A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial using resonance frequency analysis", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 24, pp.444~454 (2022)
- Misch CE, "Dental implant prosthetics", pp.71~90 (2005), CV Mosby
- Rodriguez AM, "Cantilever and implant biomechanics: a review of the literature, Part 2", J Prosthodont, 3, pp.114~118 (1994)
- Aglietta M, "A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years", Clin Oral Implants Res, 20, pp.441~451 (2009)
- Rangert B, "Bending overload and implant fracture : a retrospective clinical analysis", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 10, pp.326~334 (1995)
- Frost HM, "A 2003 update of bone physiology and Wolff’s Law for clinicians", Angle Orthod, 74, pp.3~15 (2004)
- Misch CE, "Dental implant prosthetics", pp.511~530 (2005), Elsevier Mosby